Hi Guys,

 

I may be throwing our friend Bryan to the wolves here… but…

 

Could we build this in the “models” project & repo?  It would seem to fit.

Keep the scope to as simple as possible, focused on needed operations with 
accepted info models.  Provide a method of controlled deprecation (or 
maintenance) of i/f implementations.

 

It could also extend to other VIM components if it works (but not immediately 
in deference to scope control). 

 

Just throwing it out there.

 

/ Chris

 

From: <opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org> on behalf of "Beierl, Mark" 
<mark.bei...@dell.com>
Date: Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 18:19
To: yaohelan <yaohe...@huawei.com>
Cc: TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV <opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest] [yardstick] Client version can't 
support Newton - solution proposal

 

Hello,

 

I like the idea of a common OpenStack utility library with idea #1 - the 
OpenStack client.  This seems to me to be the cleaner and more dynamic 
approach, and probably has the best support path going forward.  If I 
understand correctly, the other libraries (or at least clients) are being 
deprecated in favour of OpenStack client.  With that being said, I am not sure 
the OpenStack client has Heat (as an example) in its scope, which may force us 
into idea #2 either way.

 

This will be the first time (I think) that there is a proposal for OPNFV 
projects to share common code.  Some issues for discussion:

 

What git repo holds the code?
What project owns the git repo?  (This addresses who the committers will be)
What JIRA project tracks issues and work items?
 

Regards,

Mark

 

Mark Beierl

Advisory Solutions Architect

Dell EMC | Office of the CTO

mobile +1 613 314 8106

mark.bei...@dell.com

 

On Nov 14, 2016, at 22:31, yaohelan <yaohe...@huawei.com> wrote:

 

Hi all,

 

Here is the drafted proposal for the Newton support. Your feedback is 
appreciated.

If you have other solution, feel free to come up with.

Once we know every detail of each solution, we may vote for which one to use.

 

A common OpenStack utility library/module is needed to handle all operations 
against OpenStack, 

and it will be used by projects including Yardstick, Functest, Storperf, 
Bottleneck

and other projects that have the requirements to interact with OpenStack.

Benefit:

Only OpenStack utility library/module is required to be updated when there is 
any request for upgrading/change.

Effort will be saved for projects and they can focus on the main business.

In real world, all projects are maintaining their own repository for OpenStack 
operation.

The effort to upgrade the process will not be shared among projects.

Area to Investigate

Look at the existing codes and come up with a solution to put them together.

 

Two possible solutions to deal with client version change for different 
OpenStack

Idea 1: Leverage OpenStackClient[1] to take care of different OpenStack version

Reason: OpenStack should be able to handle the version switching and support 
the backward compatibility. 

It is quite challengeable for downstream projects to take care of the version 
with limited knowledge.

Areas to investigate

1.    Identify the all scenarios that we are leveraging clients

2.    Test with OpenStackClient to make sure all scenarios can be fulfilled

Risks/Challenges

1. Functest and Yardstick are mainly using components including Nova, Keystone, 
Neutron, Heat, etc. OpenStackClient provides a shell.py to wrapping the call 
into CLI and it seems that this way provides almost every possible alternatives 
to our currently implementation. However, if we wants to import openstackclient 
as module in the code, heat might be lost and we have to implement the logic to 
support calling different version of heatclient.

2. The learning curve might be long as it requires developers to map all of 
current implementation to openstackclient.

 

Idea 2: Design the logic to handle different clients

Areas to investigate

1.    Come up with the client list for different OpenStack version

2.    Put the client requirements into separate configuration per OpenStack 
version

3.    Dynamically decide which configuration to use

Risks/Challenges

1. A wise and general architecture is required as more OpenStack upgrades are 
expected

 

[1] https://github.com/openstack/python-openstackclient

 

 

 

发件人: Jose Lausuch [mailto:jose.laus...@ericsson.com] 
发送时间: 2016年11月11日 23:43
收件人: Beierl, Mark <mark.bei...@dell.com>; yaohelan <yaohe...@huawei.com>
抄送: liyuenan <liyue...@huawei.com>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
主题: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest] [yardstick] Client version can't 
support Newton

 

Hi,

 

That is something to be tested. I don’t know yet. We had some problems with 
version in the past, that’s why we hard-code some client versions in the import 
commands. 

 

We created this task https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FUNCTEST-529   to keep track 
of that upgrade. Helen Yao will be our hero for that activity.

 

 

JOSE LAUSUCH 
Senior Systems Designer 

Ericsson

 

 

From: Beierl, Mark [mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com] 
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2016 16:32 PM
To: Jose Lausuch
Cc: liyuenan; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest] [yardstick] Client version can't 
support Newton

 

Hello, Jose.

 

Question - what about the transitional state where some installers are still on 
v2?  Will the v3 client still work?

 

Regards,

Mark

 

Mark Beierl

Advisory Solutions Architect

Dell EMC | Office of the CTO

mobile +1 613 314 8106

mark.bei...@dell.com

 

On Nov 11, 2016, at 10:26, Jose Lausuch <jose.laus...@ericsson.com> wrote:

 

Hi,

 

We are aware of that and are in the process of supporting Newton in Functest.

Related JIRA Epic:

https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FUNCTEST-528

 

Basically, there are 2 actions the test projects need to do:

1)      Upgrade the OpenStack python clients (pip install --upgrade …)

2)      Update the module version that is imported in the code (from 
neutronclient.v3_0 import client)

 

I have created a wiki collecting this information to align in what we are 
installing in our Docker image

https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/OpenStack+python+clients

Feel free to provide feedback.

 

 

JOSE LAUSUCH 
Senior Systems Designer 

Ericsson

 

 

 

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Beierl, Mark
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2016 16:16 PM
To: liyuenan
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest] [yardstick] Client version can't 
support Newton

 

Hello,

 

This does raise an interesting dilemma: a project often will use the Python API 
directly, which means a change from v2 to v3 is a code change, not a runtime 
configuration change.  Therefore at the moment, this is not something that is 
selectable per installer.

 

I know for StorPerf, this is definitely the case, and I think I will need to 
propose a change where the client and API to use is dynamically selectable 
based on a configuration file.

 

Does any project have such code already?

 

Regards,

Mark

 

Mark Beierl

Advisory Solutions Architect

Dell EMC | Office of the CTO

mobile +1 613 314 8106

mark.bei...@dell.com

 

On Nov 11, 2016, at 02:58, liyuenan <liyue...@huawei.com> wrote:

 

Hi everyone!

 

Compass4nfv can deploy Newton now, but could not test it by yardstick or 
functest because of API version.

Newton deployed by compass4nfv use the API v3 to instead of API v2.0.

 

So I think yardstick and functest should update client version to support 
Newton.

 

Error log is in attachment. And you can deploy Newton by compass4nfv.

 

Best Regards!

Yuenan Li

 

<functest_healthcheck_error.log><functest_prepare_error.log><yardstick_ping_error.log>_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org 
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss 

_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Reply via email to